Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

AI & Law, Logic and Argument Schemes

  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper reviews the history of AI & Law research from the perspective of argument schemes. It starts with the observation that logic, although very well applicable to legal reasoning when there is uncertainty, vagueness and disagreement, is too abstract to give a fully satisfactory classification of legal argument types. It therefore needs to be supplemented with an argument-scheme approach, which classifies arguments not according to their logical form but according to their content, in particular, according to the roles that the various elements of an argument can play. This approach is then applied to legal reasoning, to identify some of the main legal argument schemes. It is also argued that much AI & Law research in fact employs the argument-scheme approach, although it usually is not presented as such. Finally, it is argued that the argument-scheme approach and the way it has been employed in AI & Law respects some of the main lessons to be learnt from Toulmin’s The Uses of Argument.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aleven, V.: 1997, Teaching Case Based Argumentation Through an Example and Models, PhD Thesis, The University of Pittsburgh

  • K. D. Ashley (1990) Modeling Legal Argument: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals MIT Press Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, K., T. J. M. Bench-Capon and P. McBurney: 2005, `Arguing About Cases as Practical Reasoning’, in Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference of Artificial Intelligence and Law. pp. 35–44, ACM Press, New York

  • T. J. M. Bench-Capon (2003) ArticleTitle‘Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks’ Journal of Logic and Computation 13 429–448 Occurrence Handle10.1093/logcom/13.3.429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • T. J. M. Bench-Capon G. Sartor (2003) ArticleTitle‘A Model of Legal Reasoning with Cases Incorporating Theories and Values’ Artificial Intelligence 150 97–143 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0004-3702(03)00108-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • P. Bergman (1997) Trial Advocacy in a Nutshell EditionNumber3rd West Publishing Co St. Paul, MN

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman D. H. and C. D. Hafner: 1987, `Indeterminacy: A Challenge to Logic-Based Models of Legal Reasoning’, in Yearbook of Law, Computers and Technology, Vol. 3, pp. 1–35, Butterworths, London

  • F. J. Bex H. Prakken C. Reed D. N. Walton (2003) ArticleTitle‘Towards a Formal Account of Reasoning About Evidence: Argumentation Schemes and Generalisations’ Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 125–165 Occurrence Handle10.1023/B:ARTI.0000046007.11806.9a

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branting L. K.: 2003, ‘An Agenda for Empirical Research In AI and Law’, in Workshop Notes of the ICAIL-2003 Workshop on Evaluation of Legal Reasoning and Problem-Solving Systems, pp. 28–35, Edinburgh, UK

  • M. C. Bromby M. J. J. Hall (2002) ‘The Development and Rapid Evaluation of the Knowledge Model of Advokate: An Advisory System to Assess the Credibility of Eyewitness Testimony’ T. J. M. Bench-Capon A. Daskalopulu R. G. F. Winkels (Eds) Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, JURIX 2002: The Fifteenth Annual Conference IOS Press Amsterdam 143–152

    Google Scholar 

  • A. Gardner Lieth ParticleVon der (1987) An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Legal Reasoning MIT Press Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • B. Garssen (2001) ‘Argument Schemes’ F. H. Eemeren Particlevan (Eds) Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory Amsterdam University Press Amsterdam 81–99

    Google Scholar 

  • T. F. Gordon (1995) The Pleadings Game. An Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht/Boston/London

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, T. F.: 2003, ‘Artificial Intelligence Models of Legal Argumentation’, Tutorial notes Ninth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Edinburgh, UK

  • J. C. Hage (1997) Reasoning with Rules. An Essay on Legal Reasoning and its Underlying Logic Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht/Boston/London

    Google Scholar 

  • J. F. Horty (2001) ‘Nonmonotonic Logic’ L. Goble (Eds) The Backwell Guide to Philosophical Logic Blackwell Publishers Oxford 336–361

    Google Scholar 

  • J. B. Kadane D. A. Schum (1996) A Probabilistic Analysis of the Sacco and Vanzetti Evidence John Wiley & Sons New York

    Google Scholar 

  • R. P. Loui J. Norman (1995) ArticleTitle‘Rationales and Argument Moves’ Artificial Intelligence and Law 3 159–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Lutomski, L. S.: 1989, ‘The Design of an Attorney’s Statistical Consultant’, in Proceedings of the Second International Conference of Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 224–233, ACM Press, New York

  • J. L. Pollock (1995) Cognitive Carpentry. A Blueprint for How to Build a Person MIT Press Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Prakken (2002) ArticleTitle‘An Exercise in Formalising Teleological Case-Based Reasoning’ Artificial Intelligence and Law 10 113–133 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1019536206548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • H. Prakken (2004) ArticleTitle‘Analysing Reasoning About Evidence with Formal Models of Argumentation’ Law, Probability & Risk 3 33–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Prakken, H., C. Reed and D. N. Walton: 2003, `Argumentation Schemes and Generalisations in Reasoning about Evidence’, in Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference of Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 32–41, ACM Press, New York

  • H. Prakken G. Sartor (1996) ArticleTitle‘A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting Arguments in Legal Reasoning’ Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 331–368

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Prakken G. Sartor (1998) ArticleTitle‘Modelling Reasoning with Precedents in a Formal Dialogue Game’ Artificial Intelligence and Law 6 231–287 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1008278309945

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • H. Prakken G. Sartor (2002) ‘The Role of Logic In Computational Models of Legal Argument: A Critical Survey’ A. Kakas F. Sadri (Eds) Computational Logic: Logic Programming and Beyond. Essays In Honour of Robert A. Kowalski, Part II Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2048 Berlin 342–380

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Prakken G. A. W. Vreeswijk (2002) ‘Logics for Defeasible Argumentation ’ D. Gabbay F. Guenthner (Eds) Handbook of Philosophical Logic EditionNumber2 NumberInSeriesVol. 4 Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht/Boston/London 219–318

    Google Scholar 

  • D. B. Skalak E. L. Rissland (1992) ArticleTitle‘Arguments and Cases: An Inevitable Intertwining’ Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 3–44 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00118477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • S. E. Toulmin (1958) The Uses of Argument Cambridge University Press Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • S. E. Toulmin (2003) The Uses of Argument EditionNumber2nd Cambridge University Press Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • B. Verheij (1996) Rules, Reasons, Arguments. Formal Studies of Argumentation and Defeat Doctoral Dissertation University of Maastricht The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Verheij, B.: 2001, ‘Legal Decision Making as Dialectical Theory Construction with Argumentation Schemes’ (research abstract), in Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference of Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 225–226, ACM Press, New York

  • B. Verheij (2003) ArticleTitle‘Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach To Legal Logic’ Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 167–195

    Google Scholar 

  • D. N. Walton (1996) Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning Erlbaum Mahwah, NJ

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University, and Faculty of Law, University of Groningen, The Netherlands

    Henry Prakken

Authors
  1. Henry Prakken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Henry Prakken.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Prakken, H. AI & Law, Logic and Argument Schemes. Argumentation 19, 303–320 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-005-4418-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-005-4418-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation